I know this seems like a crazy idea but maybe a whole new look is exactly what Halo needs to stay relevant. Now i’m not saying Halo is dying or dead but PlayStation 4 almost doubles the Xbox in pre-orders, There are brand new games coming out with new innovative technology, and it’s the start of a new generation for gaming. As much as we all want reiterations of what made halo fun in the games before, “The old stuff be this time it’s better” won’t last long in this new market. This game is do or die for the Halo franchise, There is allot of competition going on and 343 is going to have to pull out all the stops to keep Halo popular. Now the real questions is what do you consider a reboot? For one it doesn’t have to refresh the campaign at all, It can still continue from halo 4 to be a reboot, But graphic overhaul, new engine (not the halo 3 edited Halo reach edited halo 4 edited kind of engine), Darker more mature tone, Higher weapon detail, and just naming the game “Halo”. Now note that these all don’t have to require to be a reboot as i said every one has a different opinion on what i reboot is. Rebooting a game does not mean you have to completely redo it and “not make it halo anymore”. But done right this just might make Halo the game every one plays again.
Sounds pretty much like what Reach and H4 tried to do, except the engine and name.
Just naming something “halo” is confusing, especially if the plot continues from the rest of the series.
> Sounds pretty much like what Reach and H4 tried to do, except the engine.
>
> Just naming something “halo” is confusing, especially if the plot continues from the rest of the series.
It will be one of those things that people will just get used to and explained better by the developers, kind of how like every one thought Spartan ops was a complete clone of MW3 spec ops. and yes Halo 4 and reach tried to do it, Reach was better when it came to innovation. But i want Halo to be a huge lead in the halo series. I think naming it halo would make all those lost Halo players say “Whoa this could be serious.”
Halo 4 was kinda like a reboot. That didn’t turn out well.
> Halo 4 was kinda like a reboot. That didn’t turn out well.
And do you think just continuing off Halo 4 would be a better idea?
> > Halo 4 was kinda like a reboot. That didn’t turn out well.
>
> And do you think just continuing off Halo 4 would be a better idea?
No, but neither is rebooting Halo. Halo simply needs to go back to its roots: large, open campaign maps with sandbox-style gameplay, competitive arena shooter multiplayer, etc.
> > > Halo 4 was kinda like a reboot. That didn’t turn out well.
> >
> > And do you think just continuing off Halo 4 would be a better idea?
>
> No, but neither is rebooting Halo. Halo simply needs to go back to its roots: large, open campaign maps with sandbox-style gameplay, competitive arena shooter multiplayer, etc.
That can be considered a reboot.
It can’t be called Halo 5 if it were a reboot, so that’s a major obstacle. Also, a reboot would restart the storyline, so that’s an even larger obstacle. I think they should call it Halo 5, and have classic and current gameplay. That way, gamers will have the choice on what to play.
Everyone screams “GET RID OF BLAH BLAH BLAH,” but some people actually enjoy blah blah blah. Going backwards isn’t an option at this point, so they should either include both and improve, or completely rethink the sandbox again.
> It can’t be called Halo 5 if it were a reboot, so that’s a major obstacle. Also, a reboot would restart the storyline, so that’s an even larger obstacle. I think they should call it Halo 5, and have classic and current gameplay. That way, gamers will have the choice on what to play.
>
> Everyone screams “GET RID OF BLAH BLAH BLAH,” but some people actually enjoy blah blah blah. Going backwards isn’t an option at this point, so they should either include both and improve, or completely rethink the sandbox again.
This is the hardest part of making this argument, every one has a different opinion on what a reboot is and wont let up what they think it is, Michel Bay is considering Transformers 4 a reboot and it’s a continuation of the story still. The word reboot isn’t as solid as every one thinks it is. And i never said it would be called halo 5 if it was rebooted
im sure halo 5 will be a reboot of the franchise, in a sense. just not a remake. and the xbox one will be a success with or without a halo title. halo 4’s reception had nothing to do with xbox’s slow start out of the gate. and itll take more than just console war politics to bring down a brand like the xbox before the thing has even launched. i mean ffs, the ps3 was extremely lackluster. yet heres the ps4 and its doing well in preoders despite still being essentially ps3.5. meanwhile, everywhere i go i cant find a single place thats still allows xbox preorders. not best buy, gamestop, amazon, etc… i wouldnt read too far into VGChartz if i were you.
but no, halo doesnt need a remake. at all.
Oh please, we don’t need a reboot. The only reason you people most likely think that is because you didn’t like multiplayer. I could be wrong though, but I don’t see the need for a reboot. The game itself gets acceptable player numbers, and before you state it’s current population, just listen.
The only population we see is multiplayer in the current counter. It caps out at about 35,000 as of now. But what about spops, campaign, theater, forge or customs? We only know one of those, and that’s spartan ops. It usually gets about 5,000 online, so now we are at 40,000 players. Look at bf3s population. It gets about 80,000 players on Xbox during peak hours. I’m getting this info from bf3stats.com. Now at this time halo 4 is above bf3 on the xbl activity list on major Nelson. The only logical reason for that is halo 4 has players in other modes. And it is apparently over a player count of 80,000.
To be honest, These numbers are not that bad, and certainly don’t constitute a reboot of any kind. But I won’t deny that these numbers are low for a halo game, as halo 3 was able to pull in about 150,000 to 200,000 on a weekly basis.
> Oh please, we don’t need a reboot. The only reason you people most likely think that is because you didn’t like multiplayer. I could be wrong though, but I don’t see the need for a reboot. The game itself gets acceptable player numbers, and before you state it’s current population, just listen.
>
> The only population we see is multiplayer in the current counter. It caps out at about 35,000 as of now. But what about spops, campaign, theater, forge or customs? We only know one of those, and that’s spartan ops. It usually gets about 5,000 online, so now we are at 40,000 players. Look at bf3s population. It gets about 80,000 players on Xbox during peak hours. I’m getting this info from bf3stats.com. Now at this time halo 4 is above bf3 on the xbl activity list on major Nelson. The only logical reason for that is halo 4 has players in other modes. And it is apparently over a player count of 80,000.
>
> To be honest, These numbers are not that bad, and certainly don’t constitute a reboot of any kind. But I won’t deny that these numbers are low for a halo game, as halo 3 was able to pull in about 150,000 to 200,000 on a weekly basis.
What people don’t seem to be getting is that i’m not talking about the past i’m talking about the future, and i don’t need a time machine to see that this isn’t going to be as easy as past halo launches. Not to mention Playstation pulling out an exclusive to counter Halo 5. Halo is dropping in population and we cant just ignore it and pretend everything is alright, it’s the next generation and it’s a whole new ball game. I love halo 4 and the only problem i have is the level cap in multiplier. I want Halo 5 to be like Halo 3 in it’s populations again and i think this could be the right thing to do. And i highly doubt Halo 4 has Half it’s population in custom games and campaign, just compare to what you play a majority of the time in Halo 4. And yes alot of people play custom games, but not 40,000. You can’t hid the fact that Halo is dying, i know it’s hard to hear but i is slowly happening, and its not going to get easier.
It doesn’t matter what you doubt, it’s the fact of the matter that halo 4 has a higher play cou t than bf3 which has 80,000 players. There is also forge, theater and I didn’t say this before but idling, though that would only amount to a handful of players.
> It doesn’t matter what you doubt, it’s the fact of the matter that halo 4 has a higher play cou t than bf3 which has 80,000 players. There is also forge, theater and I didn’t say this before but idling, though that would only amount to a handful of players.
The fact of the matter is that Halo is dying, i know it’s hard to hear but slowly it’s happening, and no way in hell is it going to get easier with PlayStation getting the head start. What does 343 do?
> > It doesn’t matter what you doubt, it’s the fact of the matter that halo 4 has a higher play cou t than bf3 which has 80,000 players. There is also forge, theater and I didn’t say this before but idling, though that would only amount to a handful of players.
>
> The fact of the matter is that Halo is dying, i know it’s hard to hear but slowly it’s happening, and no way in hell is it going to get easier with PlayStation getting the head start. What does 343 do?
I try not to concern myself until I see more info. And what is more accurate? Halo 4 is dying or the franchise is dying. I vote the former here.
> > > Halo 4 was kinda like a reboot. That didn’t turn out well.
> >
> > And do you think just continuing off Halo 4 would be a better idea?
>
> No, but neither is rebooting Halo. Halo simply needs to go back to its roots: large, open campaign maps with sandbox-style gameplay, competitive arena shooter multiplayer, etc.
So return to Halo 2/3 and re-evolve it.
Alot of people want this. But yes, we need to see some new things never seen before.
One reason why Halo 2, was so great was that it had so many new features, that worked and were cool.
MAPS - We need much better maps witch have elements that do things (IE, Zanzibar/Last Resort Windmill and Gate).
These elements have all been lost in REACH and Halo 4.
> > > > Halo 4 was kinda like a reboot. That didn’t turn out well.
> > >
> > > And do you think just continuing off Halo 4 would be a better idea?
> >
> > No, but neither is rebooting Halo. Halo simply needs to go back to its roots: large, open campaign maps with sandbox-style gameplay, competitive arena shooter multiplayer, etc.
>
> So return to Halo 2/3 and re-evolve it.
>
> Alot of people want this. But yes, we need to see some new things never seen before.
>
> One reason why Halo 2, was so great was that it had so many new features, that worked and were cool.
Then another possible route would be to do what halo 2 did. Truly innovate. While I enjoy halo 4, it didn’t really have any new ideas, and that affected it. If halo 5 can capture a unique essence that no other shooter has, then it could very well gain a larger following. Who knows, maybe it will set some new trends again.
You’re overreacting. People not agreeing with the changes made to the PVP aspect of a game should not determine the success of the title as a whole. Halo is known for its superb multiplayer, sure. But also its epic campaigns, and rich universe and story. Yet the only thing proven in these numbers is the low multiplayer population. And by just uttering the words Halo, Next Gen, 60fps, and Dedicated servers would get most of the community excited about halo again, whether they enjoy halo 4 or not. Also consider this was 343’s first game ever and it earned them over 300 mil in its first week. breaking records. And they listen to feedback and have already implemented changes to drastically improve h4’s war games. The xbox one is doing just fine, and the future of halo is in good hands.
> You’re overreacting. People not agreeing with the changes made to the PVP aspect of a game should not determine the success of the title as a whole. Halo is known for its superb multiplayer, sure. But also its epic campaigns, and rich universe and story. Yet the only thing proven in these numbers is the low multiplayer population. And by just uttering the words Halo, Next Gen, 60fps, and Dedicated servers would get most of the community excited about halo again, whether they enjoy halo 4 or not. Also consider this was 343’s first game ever and it earned them over 300 mil in its first week. breaking records. And they listen to feedback and have already implemented changes to drastically improve h4’s war games. The xbox one is doing just fine, and the future of halo is in good hands.
I agree good sir.
> You’re overreacting. People not agreeing with the changes made to the PVP aspect of a game should not determine the success of the title as a whole. Halo is known for its superb multiplayer, sure. But also its epic campaigns, and rich universe and story. Yet the only thing proven in these numbers is the low multiplayer population. And by just uttering the words Halo, Next Gen, 60fps, and Dedicated servers would get most of the community excited about halo again, whether they enjoy halo 4 or not. Also consider this was 343’s first game ever and it earned them over 300 mil in its first week. breaking records. And they listen to feedback and have already implemented changes to drastically improve h4’s war games. The xbox one is doing just fine, and the future of halo is in good hands.
It could just be the community i’m a part of. Being a PC gammer all i hear these days is how much the Xbox and Halo suck due to the magical band wagon effect, i still think Halo needs some innovation but i think the work reboot scares people a little too much as it’s definition is so diverse and my definition differs from others.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n96cmtZc-L0